Strong Atheism

[Darkstar]

I do not make the claim that gods don't exist because I don't think absolute certainty is possible.

By this logic, though, shouldn't all claims of any kind be avoided?

That being said, to make a claim of certainty about the nonexistence of something that could qualify to be a god, I believe may be permanently beyond our capability to understand.

I don't think a hard atheist would need certainty. I should note that a 7/7 would, in fact, be a claim of certain knowledge, which I am not arguing for myself. Rather, I would consider myself a hard atheist in the sense that I believe gods don't exist (in the same sense I believe the sun will come up tomorrow), even though I am not absolutely certain. Courtroom (at least in the US) are supposed to give a verdict of guilty if there is no reasonable doubt of guilt, likewise, I will believe something if it would unreasonable not to.

Whether or not anyone should take this stance in an argument is an entirely different story. Given religious apologists' history for being disingenuous, deceitful, and slippery in debate (or actually so dumb that they genuinely don't understand your argument), we have enough of an unfair disadvantage in arguing honestly as it is; we can't afford to grant them any concessions they haven't already granted themselves.

EDIT: (i.e. I don't think hard atheism should be argued for, even if someone feels they are rationally justified in holding such a position. With the definition of hard atheist I am using, it is still possible to be a 'hard' agnostic atheist, which I would consider myself to be).